RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,443
Posts: 5,507,563
Members: 25,133
Currently online: 498
Newest member: jokerone

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Enterprise

Enterprise The final frontier has a new beginning in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 7 2014, 12:07 AM   #31
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

I'll try to be as rudimentary as possible so you can understand
Nice.

What's the closest you would estimate the rim and centre of the galaxy are from Earth, then?
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 02:22 AM   #32
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
It does break it if one wishes to reconcile Voyager with "Where No Man Has Gone Before" or STV without pretending they didn't actually travel to the rim or centre of the galaxy as shown.
The point is that it doesn't "break" because it bends. It's imaginary, not real, so everything is subject to interpretation. Details can be glossed over or rationalized, and the overall conceit of a coherent reality survives. After all, the whole thing is just pretend, so it's easy enough to pretend that something wasn't precisely what it was claimed to be in the past.


I'd say a lot more than a few ultrafast journeys "slipped through" - off the top of my head...

TOS: Where No Man Has Gone Before
TOS: By Any Other Name
TAS: The Magicks of Megas Tu
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
TNG: Conspiracy
Star Trek: First Contact
ENT: "Broken Bow"
Star Trek: Nemesis
Star Trek
Star Trek Into Darkness
Out of more than 720 episodes and films. So that's only about 1.4% of the whole. Not too bad an error rate. (Although you're forgetting "Is There In Truth No Beauty?", which also involved crossing the galactic barrier.)

But yes, there are elements of some of those that need to be disregarded. I'm not saying otherwise. Canons disregard their own past mistakes all the time. My point is that it doesn't "break" them to do so, because they're intrinsically flexible. Indeed, you've got it backward. All canons have inconsistencies, so the illusion of reality depends on the willingness to gloss over, rationalize, or ignore the parts that don't fit. What "breaks" that illusion is the refusal to do so.

In the case of "Magicks," the entire conceptual underpinning of that episode, the steady-state theory of cosmology, has been thoroughly debunked by the overwhelming evidence in support of Big Bang cosmology; thus I consider the whole episode to be as apocryphal as "Threshold" or "The Alternative Factor." There's really no way around that, since the steady-state nonsense is so inseparable from the story. And of course many subsequent Trek episodes have referenced the Big Bang, so we know it's true in-universe. A canon is entitled to overwrite its past mistakes, including scientific mistakes.

In the case of ST V, conversely, there are only three near-consecutive lines in the film that mention "the center of the galaxy" at all. If one chunk of dialogue maybe 20 seconds long were cut from the film, the problem wouldn't exist at all. So I'm content just to ignore the reference, since it has no real relevance to the story.

All your other mentions are simply of instances where ships got from one place to another unusually quickly. That's largely just poetic license, driven by the needs of the story. But it doesn't "break" anything, because the creative mind can bend. For decades, since at least the 1980 Star Trek Maps, fans have been theorizing that warp velocities vary depending on the conditions of different parts of spacetime. That idea has even been stated outright in the TNG Technical Manual and ST Encyclopedia.

As for the new movies, the 2009 film was cleverly edited to suggest a very quick jaunt from Earth to Vulcan while actually incorporating clues (such as McCoy's costume change) that considerably more time had passed. So that never bothered me. Granted, STID does show the Enterprise getting from the Klingon border to Earth in mere seconds with continuous dialogue and action throughout, so it's much harder to justify there. But mistakes happen. They don't "break" the canon because canons have the built-in ability to absorb and repair damage.


My point was merely to illustrate that there are bigger and more fundamental continuity issues in Trek than those presented in Enterprise.
I don't agree that starship travel times, or indeed any technical considerations, are "fundamental" issues. What's fundamental to a work of fiction are the characters, relationships, interactions, ideas, and emotions. The technical matters exist only in support of those fundamentals. Unless it's a work of hard science fiction where the scientific premise is the core driving idea of the tale, but then, Star Trek has never purported to be that. It's aspired to be more scientifically credible on the whole than most SFTV and film have bothered to be, and occasionally has done a good job living up to that aspiration (although only occasionally), but it's always been primarily about characters, ideas, and adventures.


King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
^^Problem being they left the galaxy at the rim, not by travelling "up" or "down"

From "By Any Other Name"...

ROJAN: There is an energy barrier at the rim of your galaxy.

KIRK: Yes, I know. We've been there.

http://www.chakoteya.net/startrek/50.htm

Thus placing both it and "Where No Man..." at the galactic rim, far far further out than you (and the 2002 Star Trek Star Charts) postulate.
That's defining "rim" far too rigidly. The dictionary says it's "the outer edge, border, margin, or brink of something, especially of a circular object." Yes, "especially" of a circular object, but not invariably. It can just as well apply to any border or margin. For instance, the same dictionary says that in metallurgy, the rim of an ingot is "an outer layer of metal having a composition different from that of the center." In other words, the entire outermost surface of a 3-dimensional object. So there's no reason the word "rim" can't be used in that sense. And even if there were, it would still be simple enough to ignore one single 3-letter word in the name of common sense.

And really, it's simple logic. The idea stated in "By Any Other Name" is that the barrier precludes safe entry or exit into the galaxy. Therefore, it must surround the whole galaxy, not just be a narrow strip around its outer edge like a bicycle tire, since in that case it would be easy to go around it.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 03:02 AM   #33
urbandefault
Captain
 
urbandefault's Avatar
 
Location: Chicken pot, chicken pot, chicken pot pie!
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

Maybe Voyager was the one that got it wrong.

Or maybe, thinking outside the box here, there were conversations we weren't privy to concerning the density of Delta Quadrant space. Like flying through the DQ was like driving through a big muddy mess that slowed the ship down and used much more energy than normal Alpha Quadrant space. In other words, what might take weeks or months in the AQ might take months or years or decades in DQ space.

Just spitballing.
urbandefault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 03:13 AM   #34
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

Christopher wrote: View Post
^You're attributing my statement to Nerys Myk there.
I wish I could write as well as you. Currently I'm reading Watching the Clock.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 06:01 AM   #35
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

urbandefault wrote: View Post
Or maybe, thinking outside the box here, there were conversations we weren't privy to concerning the density of Delta Quadrant space. Like flying through the DQ was like driving through a big muddy mess that slowed the ship down and used much more energy than normal Alpha Quadrant space. In other words, what might take weeks or months in the AQ might take months or years or decades in DQ space.
Except that VGR was just following the assumptions DS9 had established way back in "Battle Lines," when it was stated, "The Gamma Quadrant is seventy thousand light years from Bajor. It would take our fastest starship over sixty-seven years to get here." Granted, "Caretaker" said that it would take 75 years to cover "over seventy thousand light years," so evidently Voyager wasn't their fastest starship; but it's not that great a difference. It still works out pretty close to a thousand light-years per year.

True, there are cases where the velocity is clearly faster than that, and that's where the variable-warp-velocities idea comes in handy. It's often been theorized that there are "warp lanes" where the effective speed is higher than the galactic average. These could explain a lot of the anomalously fast trips we've seen in Trek, though not all of them. But for a trip spanning most of the width of the galaxy, the average velocity would probably work out to be, well, more average.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 08:11 AM   #36
Viva Sativa
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Sacramento, California
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
I'll try to be as rudimentary as possible so you can understand
Nice.

What's the closest you would estimate the rim and centre of the galaxy are from Earth, then?
I couldn't tell you because I'm ignorant of such distances.

To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge. -Benjamin Disraeli
Viva Sativa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 10:29 AM   #37
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

The rim or the outer rim?

The centre or the center?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 04:18 PM   #38
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

teacake wrote: View Post
The rim or the outer rim?

The centre or the center?
And if sending a ship to the moon is a "moonshot", would that make sending a ship to the rim a "rimshot"?

__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 12:31 AM   #39
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

And if you send a ship to Ferenginar is that the money shot?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 12:41 AM   #40
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

Sure! And, if your ship is put on patrol at the edge of the galaxy, you've been given the rim... occupation.
__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 01:54 AM   #41
Starbreaker
Fleet Admiral
 
Starbreaker's Avatar
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
View Starbreaker's Twitter Profile
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

No Star Trek series has ever been made to fit into the 'continuity' or the 'canon'. They're made to entertain fans. 99% of the viewing audience doesn't notice stuff like warp factors or what directions anomalies face on the full moon of a certain Klingon holiday.
__________________
Currently Reading: The Martian by Andy Weir
Currently Watching: The Walking Dead, Doctor Who, CSI, Criminal Minds, NCIS, NCIS:NO, Law & Order: SVU, Stalker, American Horror Story, and Bones
Starbreaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 03:24 AM   #42
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

I've been watching Trek for decades and I don't notice that stuff!
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 02:12 PM   #43
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

Christopher wrote:
STID does show the Enterprise getting from the Klingon border to Earth in mere seconds with continuous dialogue and action throughout, so it's much harder to justify there. But mistakes happen. They don't "break" the canon because canons have the built-in ability to absorb and repair damage.
You're assuming a mistake has been made, when I suggest they're deliberately using the faster examples I've cited as their baseline - moving the goal posts back to where they were, so to speak. IMHO everything apart from Voyager fits nicely into this framework - no need to ignore lines like "rim of the galaxy" and "centre of the galaxy"

Each to their own, I guess.
Viva Sativa wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
I'll try to be as rudimentary as possible so you can understand
Nice.

What's the closest you would estimate the rim and centre of the galaxy are from Earth, then?
I couldn't tell you because I'm ignorant of such distances.

To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge. -Benjamin Disraeli
When the whole point of the story is that they're leaving the galaxy or travelling to it's centre, it seems rather silly to pretend they didn't know where they really were.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 03:15 PM   #44
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

Viva Sativa wrote: View Post
I watched the series despite its plethora of issues because I love Star Trek. Am I the only one that tolerated captain Archer and his shipmates? Am I the only one who feels that Star Trek Enterprise was just another chance for Hollywood to revamp the series with new special effects and makeup without stressing whether the plot would correlate with the previous series.
Having watched all Trek series, most of them in their original runs, and now courtesy of Netflix re-watching, I can't say that "Enterprise" suffered any more or any less than the other Trek shows with regards to internal continuity.

Certainly, if omission of previous encounters within the series is a measure of continuity flaws, then TOS has as much as any others. At one point, in Season 3 (I think?) they almost mention the Horta, but in such a ham-handed way, it didn't feel like they were remembering the same adventure.
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2014, 04:12 PM   #45
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching ENT despite the continuity flaws.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
You're assuming a mistake has been made, when I suggest they're deliberately using the faster examples I've cited as their baseline - moving the goal posts back to where they were, so to speak.
No, TOS never treated the trip from Earth to Vulcan, or the Klingon border, as nigh-instantaneous. TOS was about a starship exploring deep space, far from its home port and never returning there. The modern series' effortless commutes from Earth to everywhere else are a complete abandonment of the original intent of Trek. It's not much of a frontier if you get there faster than you can walk to the corner store.

And as I said, we know for a fact that the filmmakers of ST '09 structured the trip to Vulcan to imply it took longer than shown; Abrams wanted it to flow smoothly for the sake of pacing, but subtly acknowledged the underlying reality that it would realistically have to take more than a few moments. McCoy's change of clothing and Kirk's time spent sedated suggest that a few hours at least have elapsed even though the editing implies a quicker pace. This was entirely intentional, as we know for certain from statements made by the filmmakers. So STID's failure to acknowledge the same passage of time in a trip from the Klingon border to Earth contradicts the intentions of the previous film. And thus, yes, I think I can validly call it a mistake, an oversight on the filmmakers' part -- or, if it was an intentional oversight, still a bad and unnecessary idea.


IMHO everything apart from Voyager fits nicely into this framework - no need to ignore lines like "rim of the galaxy" and "centre of the galaxy"
And I've already proven that that's not true, that VGR is merely following the precedent established in TNG and DS9. I cited DS9's "Battle Lines" as establishing specific travel time, but I forgot that the precedent was actually set far earlier in TNG's "The Price." The Barzan wormhole was said to span 70,000 light years (the same distance as the Bajoran wormhole and nearly the same as Voyager's journey), and Picard said that the travel time at normal warp would be "eighty years or so." There's also "Q Who," in which the ship was thrown 7,000 light-years across space and Data said it would take two years, seven months to reach the nearest starbase. (Not to return to their original position, though, so perhaps that nearest starbase is substantially closer than where they started from.) So it's been consistent throughout TNG, DS9, and VGR that 24th-century warp drive would take years to span thousands of light-years. The specific cited travel times are inconsistent, but all within an order of magnitude of 1000 times the speed of light.

Indeed, the whole concept of DS9 goes out the window if you can get from Earth to Vulcan (canonically 16 light-years) in a couple of minutes, or to the center of the galaxy (c. 27,000 light-years) in less than an hour. At the former speed, Dominion space would be only a few days away, and at the latter it would be only a couple of hours away. In either case, the wormhole would have no value or strategic importance. Obviously the entire series of DS9 depends on that not being the case, on inter-quadrant travel taking decades via conventional warp drive. As do TNG episodes like "Where No One Has Gone Before," "Q Who," "The Price," "The Nth Degree," and "Descent."

So you're absolutely wrong to say that VGR is the only series based on this premise. The same limit on warp velocities applies throughout TNG, DS9, VGR, and obviously ENT where the ships were slower. That's the vast majority of the entire Trek franchise -- 628 episodes/films out of a total 738 to date (counting "The Cage" and both parts of "The Menagerie" separately). That's 85% of canon.


When the whole point of the story is that they're leaving the galaxy or travelling to it's centre, it seems rather silly to pretend they didn't know where they really were.
As stated, the galactic center is 27,000 +/- 1000 light-years from Earth. The thin disk of the galaxy has no real definable edge, of course, but it's estimated to be roughly 3300 ly thick, meaning the nearest face would be about 1600 ly away. Although it's irregular enough that there's no way to define that exactly. Of course the whole idea of an "energy barrier at the edge of the galaxy" is complete nonsense.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
continuity, controversy, ent

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.